Leave it in.
I am a former professor. In academics "different fields" is ambiguous, and has been used to indicate entire other fields of study: Like perhaps electrical engineering and circuit design, closely related to "computing machinery", but not "computer science" which is typically a theoretical approach uninvolved in the electronics, studying compilers, algorithms, theoretical architectural ideas (like Tomasulo's Algorithm, caches and virtual memory and minimizing paging or [address] translation lookaside buffer delays). It can get close to the hardware without designing circuits, considering logic gate arrangements and cycle counts (as we must to learn how basic arithmetic is accomplished and sometimes how the instruction decoding pipeline is built, which is constantly being tweaked for on nearly every processor revision or new design).
It is better to qualify "different fields" as specifically computer science fields. It is quite common for researchers to be advised to consider how problems were solved in "different fields", like engineering, biology, chemistry or evolution: In fact, the entire field of AI using "Genetic Algorithms" is inspired by Darwinian Evolution.
Keep your qualifier.